Manchester by the Sea (Kenneth Lonergan, 2016)
- Brian C
- I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
- Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
- Location: Chicago, IL
Re: Manchester by the Sea (Kenneth Lonergan, 2016)
The only thing hotter than the fire that killed his kids was that take.
- Never Cursed
- Such is life on board the Redoutable
- Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2016 12:22 am
Re: Miserable Jerkwads by the Sea (Kenneth Lonergan, 2016)
As much as I agree with everyone that we should all try and post more constructive or film-related stuff, jesus, it shouldn't be like this. Was that a review or a submission to the "Rediculous" thread?
- Magic Hate Ball
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 6:15 pm
- Location: Seattle, WA
Re: Manchester by the Sea (Kenneth Lonergan, 2016)
Eh, it just wasn't for me.
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Re: Manchester by the Sea (Kenneth Lonergan, 2016)
Yes, because our objection is that you didn't like the film and not at all about how you expressed it
- Magic Hate Ball
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 6:15 pm
- Location: Seattle, WA
Re: Manchester by the Sea (Kenneth Lonergan, 2016)
It's a good dissection and criticism of its own subjects but I wasn't a big fan of the presentation. If it were done in a series of longer, talkier sequences I think it would've clicked better for me, rather than fractured into a bunch of vignettes that kind of run together (I think Spotlight did this form better). It feels like all the scenes are hurrying to get to the point, which makes the long, weepy flashbacks feel even more top-heavy with all the ostentatious music. I also had a hard time following the tone of the film - sometimes it felt like it was a satire of its own culture, and sometimes it felt like it was supposed to be hearty and realistic, but that's partially my fault, since New England is such an alien place to me. The hardcore masculine norms, the buttoned-up religious vibes, the weird way everyone's constantly mouthing off to each other, it's like watching a movie about Martians in crisis.
- knives
- Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm
Re: Manchester by the Sea (Kenneth Lonergan, 2016)
I did not see your version of this film thankfully.
- Magic Hate Ball
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 6:15 pm
- Location: Seattle, WA
Re: Manchester by the Sea (Kenneth Lonergan, 2016)
Mostly I wish I'd gone into it knowing it would be so Tracy Letts-esque.
edit: I'd like to see it again just so I could re-watch it knowing that it's so much more about masculinity in particular than it is about dealing with grief. In retrospect, it's too bad this was sold to me as, because it made the flashbacks weak, and that revelation is a huge part of the film's structure.
edit: I'd like to see it again just so I could re-watch it knowing that it's so much more about masculinity in particular than it is about dealing with grief. In retrospect, it's too bad this was sold to me as
SpoilerShow
man tries to get over trauma of killing his children via neglect
- D50
- Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 2:00 am
- Location: USA
Re: Manchester by the Sea (Kenneth Lonergan, 2016)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3U2Puf9u6rolacritfan wrote:J...Also the guy who yells "Great parenting" was Kenneth Lonergan, wondered why they stayed on him for a beat.
- Roger Ryan
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
- Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city
Re: Manchester by the Sea (Kenneth Lonergan, 2016)
Seeing this again, I'm convinced the brief tracking shot of Lonergan at the end is being used to cover some trimmed dialogue and to allow Afflect and Hedges to get to their vehicle quicker - it's just how the sausage is made.D50 wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3U2Puf9u6rolacritfan wrote:J...Also the guy who yells "Great parenting" was Kenneth Lonergan, wondered why they stayed on him for a beat.
- therewillbeblus
- Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm
Re: Manchester by the Sea (Kenneth Lonergan, 2016)
This is quite possibly my favorite normal-length feature from the last decade, and I find myself expanding my appreciation for one scene in particular as I reflect on it, oddly the scene that felt the most dismissive and strange when I first caught the film in theatres.
SpoilerShow
The scene where Hedges goes to visit his mother is an unexpected awakening that says a lot by posturing at contrivances while refusing to submit to them. There were laughs in both of my theatrical screenings at the deadpan observations as we-as-Hedges glance around at the Christian iconography. However, when Hedges brings up his stigmatized reaction to Affleck, his uncle tempers this by reminding him that “we’re Catholic” too. That cultural edge is never uttered in absolute terms, but this is a film very much about culture, the Irish-Catholic Bostonian introversion, stubbornness, masochism, suppression, and functional alcoholism to cope with problems. The fact that this behavior of alcohol abuse isn’t cited as the problem shows us who the subjects are of this film. We are seeing the world through either Hedges' or Affleck’s view, and in the latter's case not as an outsider judging him, for he’s doing just fine on that self-critical front on his own. What we may deem as problematic alcohol use is a strategy, not the source of his issue.
Similarly, what the scene with Mol and Broderick suggests is as sobering as it is deflating for Hedges- that when an alcoholic stops drinking that doesn’t solve the problems of their character. Mol doesn’t know how to act, she isn’t wholly self-actualized through her Christianity and physical sobriety, and we shouldn't have expected her to be. She carries shame, regret, struggles with will power, and a lack of skills to overcome her delicacies. Broderick’s response to Hedges may not be warm with compassion, but from a 12-step programmatic perspective, his prioritization of Mol’s mental health must be the focus on his attention without apology, because without her stability in recovery all else will crumble and there will be no chances for continued rehabilitation. His energy, along with her’s, prove that imperfections persist and Hedges conceptualization that “my mom used to be an alcoholic, she’s not anymore” is destroyed before our eyes. The Christian figures he gawks at are likely helping her significantly, but we can only see the scene through his perspective for the brief, awkward time he's there, and it’s one of disappointment. When his mother was in active addiction, it was easier to blame problems on the addiction, but now that she isn’t, how confusing is it to face the truth that it’s more than just that? This is something that most, if not all addicts in recovery face earlier on, and you hear it ubiquitously at beginner AA meetings: “I thought my problem was alcohol, but then I got sober and still behaved the same, and realized that alcohol was the cure to the problem which is me.”
Affleck, who generally has less sympathy for Mol, defends her faith- perhaps because it’s a piece of identity they all share, but also likely because it’s also a support she needs just as he needs it. The flagellation he uses as a tool to treat his own shame is inspired by this culture, and he uses alcohol as a similar support to treat it. In a subconscious way, Affleck identifies with Mol probably more than any two characters identify in the film, even if he detests her. They have both made irreparable mistakes that have had permanent consequences on the people they love the most, and both have had to manage these traumas in isolation from the people they’ve hurt. If Affleck doesn’t believe that Mol can change, as he expresses to Hedges throughout the build-up, it’s because he doesn’t believe in rehabilitation for himself- another very common trait of that self-destructive addict mentality: If I can’t see hope for myself, then the world must be reflective of my solipsistic vision. And yet, here’s Affleck in the car ride home from that visit, telling Hedges about their cultural similarities, panning back his own judgments for a moment to serve as an objective truthsayer to help Hedges expand his own peripheries and reframe faith as a strength beyond face-value pejorative assessments. This transition from depressive hermit to stable mentor cements a huge theme of the film- that even the most broken human being can be helpful to another person, despite not being able to help themselves with the same tools. There’s something very Christian about that idea as well, and one that Lonergan seems to take to heart to counter the Catholic-guilt-perpetuated self-harm with an optimistic affirmation of our capabilities to reciprocally-console each other in this challenging life.
Similarly, what the scene with Mol and Broderick suggests is as sobering as it is deflating for Hedges- that when an alcoholic stops drinking that doesn’t solve the problems of their character. Mol doesn’t know how to act, she isn’t wholly self-actualized through her Christianity and physical sobriety, and we shouldn't have expected her to be. She carries shame, regret, struggles with will power, and a lack of skills to overcome her delicacies. Broderick’s response to Hedges may not be warm with compassion, but from a 12-step programmatic perspective, his prioritization of Mol’s mental health must be the focus on his attention without apology, because without her stability in recovery all else will crumble and there will be no chances for continued rehabilitation. His energy, along with her’s, prove that imperfections persist and Hedges conceptualization that “my mom used to be an alcoholic, she’s not anymore” is destroyed before our eyes. The Christian figures he gawks at are likely helping her significantly, but we can only see the scene through his perspective for the brief, awkward time he's there, and it’s one of disappointment. When his mother was in active addiction, it was easier to blame problems on the addiction, but now that she isn’t, how confusing is it to face the truth that it’s more than just that? This is something that most, if not all addicts in recovery face earlier on, and you hear it ubiquitously at beginner AA meetings: “I thought my problem was alcohol, but then I got sober and still behaved the same, and realized that alcohol was the cure to the problem which is me.”
Affleck, who generally has less sympathy for Mol, defends her faith- perhaps because it’s a piece of identity they all share, but also likely because it’s also a support she needs just as he needs it. The flagellation he uses as a tool to treat his own shame is inspired by this culture, and he uses alcohol as a similar support to treat it. In a subconscious way, Affleck identifies with Mol probably more than any two characters identify in the film, even if he detests her. They have both made irreparable mistakes that have had permanent consequences on the people they love the most, and both have had to manage these traumas in isolation from the people they’ve hurt. If Affleck doesn’t believe that Mol can change, as he expresses to Hedges throughout the build-up, it’s because he doesn’t believe in rehabilitation for himself- another very common trait of that self-destructive addict mentality: If I can’t see hope for myself, then the world must be reflective of my solipsistic vision. And yet, here’s Affleck in the car ride home from that visit, telling Hedges about their cultural similarities, panning back his own judgments for a moment to serve as an objective truthsayer to help Hedges expand his own peripheries and reframe faith as a strength beyond face-value pejorative assessments. This transition from depressive hermit to stable mentor cements a huge theme of the film- that even the most broken human being can be helpful to another person, despite not being able to help themselves with the same tools. There’s something very Christian about that idea as well, and one that Lonergan seems to take to heart to counter the Catholic-guilt-perpetuated self-harm with an optimistic affirmation of our capabilities to reciprocally-console each other in this challenging life.
- aox
- Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:02 pm
- Location: nYc
Re: Manchester by the Sea (Kenneth Lonergan, 2016)
Not that my opinion matters, but that's a fantastic analysis, TWBBs.
- therewillbeblus
- Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm
Re: Manchester by the Sea (Kenneth Lonergan, 2016)
Thanks, and your opinion matters as much as anyone's. One point I forgot to add
SpoilerShow
is that the idea of being ‘cured’, either by referring to the lifelong disease of alcoholism as a past state or the concept of being able to move past life-altering trauma, is also undone as we the audience begin to understand that finite resolutions don’t exist in some lives as time and experience stack together to form a person, and aren’t afforded the episodic benefits of exclusive, segregated events. We know that alcoholism is something that one does not recover from, but needs to be constantly treated for life. We also know now that trauma is not an event, but an experience that someone ‘lives with’ as well. Affleck and Mol are “in recovery”, as are most people in one way or another- and that's the source of their commonality I was gesturing towards.
Hedges is too. His way of seeing things as conclusive stages will be reshaped by time, and his father’s death will never stop affecting him, but that doesn’t mean he’s doomed to be miserable or have that event pervasively infect his every waking moment, just like his mother will not get cravings every day, and Affleck may also one day be able to go for longer periods of time without self-destructing, likely by spending time with Hedges and other people who he loves. The worldview that we are all in this fluid, dynamic yet permanent, state of 'recovery' isn't the recycled death sentence Affleck may see it as, but a supremely validating, compassionate, and liberating outlook, when accepted as one's philosophy.
Hedges is too. His way of seeing things as conclusive stages will be reshaped by time, and his father’s death will never stop affecting him, but that doesn’t mean he’s doomed to be miserable or have that event pervasively infect his every waking moment, just like his mother will not get cravings every day, and Affleck may also one day be able to go for longer periods of time without self-destructing, likely by spending time with Hedges and other people who he loves. The worldview that we are all in this fluid, dynamic yet permanent, state of 'recovery' isn't the recycled death sentence Affleck may see it as, but a supremely validating, compassionate, and liberating outlook, when accepted as one's philosophy.
- therewillbeblus
- Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm
Re: Manchester by the Sea (Kenneth Lonergan, 2016)
I noticed another wonderful detail revisiting this again last night:
SpoilerShow
The scene where Lee forcibly breaks open Patrick's door and tells him he can't let him in there alone is interesting, because it comes across as Lee responding uniquely and cluelessly to the situation at hand, when it's actually implicitly based upon his own experiences being on the receiving end of such care. Everything we've seen about Lee so far (including in the moment directly before when he doesn't know how to respond to Patrick's crying and inappropriately floods him with questions about what Lee, the parent, should do) indicates that he has few skills, if any, in parenting children above a certain age, and nothing about Patrick's behavior should raise flags of safety risk. But Lee asks if he's having a "mental breakdown" and, within the same house where he stayed when he was suicidal and having a breakdown, treats the situation with clear rigid and intrusive measures in the way one would do to a person who is actively suicidal.
It's an extrapolation of his own trauma, agilely transitioning from inept parent into confident caretaker, embodying his brother in that moment (and, really, only in that moment). The film has many wonderful elisions, but this might be the best: A wealth of information about how his brother Joe intervened with him when he needed to be taken care of, and even more powerful, Lee's ability to learn and implement new skills based on that experience with his brother. In this 'second life' he's primarily been shedding skill sets, but the ones he's developed are based entirely on this unconditional care he received when nobody else would grant him that, not even himself. He only stayed alive for Joe, and now he will for Patrick, in a version of Joe's role. How beautiful.
It's an extrapolation of his own trauma, agilely transitioning from inept parent into confident caretaker, embodying his brother in that moment (and, really, only in that moment). The film has many wonderful elisions, but this might be the best: A wealth of information about how his brother Joe intervened with him when he needed to be taken care of, and even more powerful, Lee's ability to learn and implement new skills based on that experience with his brother. In this 'second life' he's primarily been shedding skill sets, but the ones he's developed are based entirely on this unconditional care he received when nobody else would grant him that, not even himself. He only stayed alive for Joe, and now he will for Patrick, in a version of Joe's role. How beautiful.